174 Ind. App. 423 - Stinchfield v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently September 2012
12 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Katz v. United States · Johnson v. Zerbst · Mapp v. Ohio · Bumper v. North Carolina
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““wherein the informant, or undercover agent, enters a suspect’s house on the latter’s invitation, and then purchases, or otherwise acquires contraband with the consent of the suspect (whether or not the suspect is cognizant of the informant’s subterfuge). In such cases the informant usually delivers the acquired substance to an officer who then might procure a search warrant for the suspect’s home. See Mills v. State (1975), Ind.App., 325 N.E.2d 472 , and cases therein cited. However, the record of the instant case, in contrast to Mills , supplies no information regarding the propriety of the informant’s conduct while within Stinchfield’s home, and we will not speculate on his manner of obtaining the drugs in question.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Watt v. State
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.